About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)
. susan rice's appalling words when she put election politics ahead of stopping the again side in rwanda. before that tweet was deleted. a 2002 article claims rice said this. if we use the word again side and are seen as doing nothing, what will be the effect on the november congressional election? our foreign affairs reporter is out front tonight. elise, does the criticism against rice add up, do you think? >> i don't think 100%, soledad. susan rice was director for u.n. affairs at the national security council at the time of the again side, the rwanda again side. that office dealt more with the united nations than with africa, even though the united nations was dealing with the issue. at the time it was a working level staff position. her first in government, ambassador rice could make announcements at that level, but wouldn't be involved making an important decision getting involved militarily in rwanda. president clinton said he made the decision, it was the greatest mistake of his presidency, and ambassador rice travelled to rwanda after the again side. she said seeing the ground li
elections taking place in japan on the 16th and south korea on the 19th of this month. well within the range of this test that is scheduled to come in the coming days. influencing their neighbors and influencing politics and testing new ground with what would a second-term approach be with obama. bill: this is what we believe to be the ultimate range. 5,000 to 6,000 kilometers. 3,700 miles. china to the west here. in japan well within range of north korea were to be successful in developing this launch mechanism. here is hawaii. that's outside the range of the 6,000 kilometers. the question then begs how realistic is it that north korea would be a threat to the united states? >> through pro live raig they could be a threat to the united states. and if they were to hit our allies in the near range. in the south and also japan. those are the near-term risks. but proliferation could occur at any time. they were able to reach to hawaii ... bill: history shows they are not very good at this. are they getting better? >> only more tests will tell. you are correct history has shown it's been embarra
, as the first popularly elected chief executive of egypt in its 3,000 year history. in a year of being in office, he said, the courts can not everrule me and no one can sue me and no one can second-guess me and what i say is the law. while he did that, he got the legislature, which was elected with him to write a new constitution without debate or input and against the rules of the present constitution and he is just putting it out there for the public to vote on. why are the judges so upset? the egyptian system of judges is similar to ours and to the british system, and judges can say to the government, that is unconstitutional. can you not do it. not in the islamic world which is what the constitution will have. their goal is an oath that is any dealt to shiria law, not rights of divided powers. >>shepard: egypt is the most powerful because of the numbers, 80 million people in egypt, they are overseeing so much of what is happening including the peace treaty of sorts between hamas and the palestinians and the israeli government and if egypt is in that sort of turmoil, the world is a more shaky
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)